I plead guilty to being one of those Conference participants who has rarely accessed the Forum much less responded to issues raised.
Until now. This thread about the restructuring of the competition licensing process was brought to my attention by fellow drivers with
decades more experience than I and whose opinions I highly respect. My opinion was sought due to my being a fellow race driver
as well as a retired physician. I am very concerned with and dead-set against changing the requirements for a race license in regards to a
medical exam.
I am fully behind getting young blood into our sport but not at the potential risk of spilling some in the process. I am incredulous that any thought
whatsoever is being given to lowering the standards for obtaining a competition license. We willingly participate in an inherently dangerous sport
where both the inanimate a well as sentient machinery is, by definition, tested to their limits. The least we can do is engage a rigorous attempt to
reassure ourselves, as well as those participating with us, that as much care has been taken to safeguard us as is possible given the nature of the sport.
We require tech checklists and equipment examinations by marshals at the track prior to our cars being deemed safe to participate. Should any less be required of the drivers piloting those machines? Do we “forgive” a brand new car from undergoing a tech scrutiny simply because it is new (or “young”) and is less apt to have anything wrong with it yet require more vigorous examinations of older yet just as worthy cars? No, the same standards are applied to all.
Should we expect anything less of the medical histories , checklists and examinations (infrequent for the younger and more frequent for the older drivers such as myself) that we should all willingly subject ourselves to in order to assure ourselves and those driving at the limit next to us that man and equipment are both up to the task?
Do a checklist and tech scrutiny assure us that something untoward might not happen on track? Of course not, but it is the best assurance we have against otherwise unforeseen mishaps. The same can be said of the medical hurdles we must all pass regularly for the privilege of driving as we do.
I will not rehash the very thoughtful remarks made by others on this thread. They are all warranted and worthy of our rethinking of this new policy. And, the issue of money should never trump that of safety.
My racing experience started with SOVREN. I left that body in favor of ICSCC after I witnessed too many safety issues go unaddressed and too much deference paid to longstanding and previously valued participants whose heydays had long been passed. I worry that not only are our standards being eroded in terms of maximum safety but that some may attempt to game this issue by “downgrading” themselves from an IRR license to an ARR license in order to sidestep a potentially problematic and disqualifying medical exam.
Respectfully submitted,
Peter Killefer
#1503
Until now. This thread about the restructuring of the competition licensing process was brought to my attention by fellow drivers with
decades more experience than I and whose opinions I highly respect. My opinion was sought due to my being a fellow race driver
as well as a retired physician. I am very concerned with and dead-set against changing the requirements for a race license in regards to a
medical exam.
I am fully behind getting young blood into our sport but not at the potential risk of spilling some in the process. I am incredulous that any thought
whatsoever is being given to lowering the standards for obtaining a competition license. We willingly participate in an inherently dangerous sport
where both the inanimate a well as sentient machinery is, by definition, tested to their limits. The least we can do is engage a rigorous attempt to
reassure ourselves, as well as those participating with us, that as much care has been taken to safeguard us as is possible given the nature of the sport.
We require tech checklists and equipment examinations by marshals at the track prior to our cars being deemed safe to participate. Should any less be required of the drivers piloting those machines? Do we “forgive” a brand new car from undergoing a tech scrutiny simply because it is new (or “young”) and is less apt to have anything wrong with it yet require more vigorous examinations of older yet just as worthy cars? No, the same standards are applied to all.
Should we expect anything less of the medical histories , checklists and examinations (infrequent for the younger and more frequent for the older drivers such as myself) that we should all willingly subject ourselves to in order to assure ourselves and those driving at the limit next to us that man and equipment are both up to the task?
Do a checklist and tech scrutiny assure us that something untoward might not happen on track? Of course not, but it is the best assurance we have against otherwise unforeseen mishaps. The same can be said of the medical hurdles we must all pass regularly for the privilege of driving as we do.
I will not rehash the very thoughtful remarks made by others on this thread. They are all warranted and worthy of our rethinking of this new policy. And, the issue of money should never trump that of safety.
My racing experience started with SOVREN. I left that body in favor of ICSCC after I witnessed too many safety issues go unaddressed and too much deference paid to longstanding and previously valued participants whose heydays had long been passed. I worry that not only are our standards being eroded in terms of maximum safety but that some may attempt to game this issue by “downgrading” themselves from an IRR license to an ARR license in order to sidestep a potentially problematic and disqualifying medical exam.
Respectfully submitted,
Peter Killefer
#1503